California Cities and Counties Can “Just Say No” to Medical Marijuana Dispensaries
By Alan Murphy
“The California Supreme Court has unanimously upheld a local ban on medical marijuana dispensaries, holding the ban was not preempted by state statutes governing medical marijuana.
The decision does not come as a surprise, given that state court of appeal decisions consistently have upheld local land use regulation of dispensaries.”
California Commercial Building Owners Must Comply With New Energy Use Disclosure Rules
Commencing July 1, 2013
By Pamela Westhoff and Lydia Lake
“What you need to know:
The long-awaited energy use disclosure requirements, first enacted as AB 1103 (Saldana) in 2007 (codified as California Public Resources Code, §25402.10), are finally effective. Commencing July 1, 2013, owners of commercial, non-residential buildings in excess of 50,000 square feet will be required to track and disclose detailed information regarding energy consumption at each building. The reporting requirements will be extended to buildings in excess of 10,000 square feet commencing on January 1, 2014; and to buildings in excess of 5,000 square feet on July 1, 2014.”
“In response to a lawsuit PLF filed on behalf of New Mexico property owners Peter and Frankie Smith, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers admitted it had no evidence whatsoever to declare a dry creek bed on the Smiths’ property a “water of the United States” subject to the Corps’ regulatory authority under the Clean Water Act.”
Analysis by Lyle Denniston:
“Something really big, and potentially decisive, happened to a major new property rights case between the time the Supreme Court took it on, and Tuesday’s argument by lawyers before the Court. The very idea that an unconstitutional “taking” had occurred to an owner of a small plot of ground in Florida seemed near to vanishing, propelled toward oblivion by a spreading fear on the bench that maybe the entire regulatory apparatus of government might be at risk. Credit lawyers for a state agency and the federal government for deepening this anxiety.”
On January 15, 2013, “the U.S. Supreme Court will hear one of the most important property rights cases in years” — the PLF case of Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District.
Today the Supreme Court handed down its decision in a much-anticipated property-rights case, Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States. It was yet another unanimous defeat for an administration that has developed a noted pattern of adopting positions that fail to sway even one justice.
By Ilya Shaprio and Timothy Sandefur:
The right to build a home or a business on your own land is basic to the very concept of property rights. Of course, government can impose reasonable conditions for health and safety, but too often, officials misuse land-use permitting to enrich the public sector rather than for legitimate regulation. In fact, many bureaucrats view the right to develop one’s property as a privilege landowners must purchase, sometimes at the cost of their constitutional freedoms. Thankfully, the U.S. Supreme Court recently accepted a Florida case that could force an attitude change on regulators across the country.
Kaid Benfield, Better! Cities and Towns
If the new Encinitas City Council majority decides to engage at all in the business of land-use planning upon taking office, they would do well to consider Kaid Benfield’s thoughtful article on height restrictions and urban density.
